Recommended Ballistic Computer

I'm looking at getting an ipod touch for the ballistics programs. They seem like a no-brainer to me, a absolutely amazing tool to use. As the saying goes, Computers only do exactly as their told. Yeah, there are more variables than you are plugging into it, but it would give you great close figures, and that's better then I could do myself.
 
Trevor60 said:
You guys are just screwing with us right... your not seriously telling us that you would take a ballistic programs drop table over real world data. The program is only an aid for real world data

QUOTE]

I guess you didn't read my post just before yours. Isn't that what I essentially said.
Click to expand...
 
I like Exbal loaded on a Palm. I also have it loaded on my PC. The Palm platform works well in the field, and allows notes to be taken, without additional paper. There are fairly small, and use AAA batteries, so no worries about charging. I have these availible if anyone is interested. Please PM.

R.
 
Until last summer, I was not very impressed with these programs. Nowadays, they seem to cover more of the bases that are needed to get an accurate firing solution. A huge improvement was when Bryan Litz tested a whole whack of VLD/Match bullets and put some real world G7 numbers into the mix.

HOWEVER:

1) has any program figured out how to compensate for the location of the Sun and the intensity of the light vs ambient conditions?

2) has any program been able to estimate wind direction and intensity over the entire distance of travel?

Not trying to be a sh!t but these are two major areas I have yet to see figured out. And two areas that will have a FAR greater affect on your POI then anything any Kestrel/weather station can provide.

All I am saying is that as good as a computer program is, the input info in only limited to some of the possible variables. So it can only make an estimate of what the real world conditions will really do to that bullet.

An improvement, yes absolutely. But you had better get out there and shoot ALOT before trusting the output on that LCD screen.

Because if you have shot a bunch LR, you know things change that you simply cannot track with handheld devices.

But experience will certainly help.

Jerry
 
Simple test.

Set up a rifle in rests and tie it down so it can't move. Center the crosshair on a target at 200yds or further. The further you go, the dramatic the effect is. Do this at say 10am.

come back at noon and 2pm and 4pm and view the target again.

Is the crosshairs still centered?

If you have a variable cloudy day with shiney breaks, you can repeat the test viewing the target as the sun goes in and out of the clouds. Then also at different times of the day.

Just make sure the rifle can't move on its own.

This is something every competition shooter faces and either figures out how to deal with it, or drops a bunch of points.

Jerry
 
mysticplayer said:
Until last summer, I was not very impressed with these programs. Nowadays, they seem to cover more of the bases that are needed to get an accurate firing solution. A huge improvement was when Bryan Litz tested a whole whack of VLD/Match bullets and put some real world G7 numbers into the mix.

HOWEVER:

1) has any program figured out how to compensate for the location of the Sun and the intensity of the light vs ambient conditions?

2) has any program been able to estimate wind direction and intensity over the entire distance of travel?

Not trying to be a sh!t but these are two major areas I have yet to see figured out. And two areas that will have a FAR greater affect on your POI then anything any Kestrel/weather station can provide.

All I am saying is that as good as a computer program is, the input info in only limited to some of the possible variables. So it can only make an estimate of what the real world conditions will really do to that bullet.

An improvement, yes absolutely. But you had better get out there and shoot ALOT before trusting the output on that LCD screen.

Because if you have shot a bunch LR, you know things change that you simply cannot track with handheld devices.

But experience will certainly help.

Jerry
Click to expand...

Your not being a @^%& at all. :D
You are being realistic.

I shoot in extremely hilly country.
To get a 1500 yard shot I typically shoot across the top of one ridge with the wind coming uphill in one direction, across a valley holding updrafts and slight winds up the valley, and onto the top of another mountain ridge with the wind blowing a completely different (normally opposite) direction.

There is no ballistic calculator that allows for all of the variables here...Some careful observations and entries can help get you nearer the target, however at some point no device can guarantee a hit.

Which is why I prefaced my comment with "reasonable distances".
 
c3pppo said:
So, Trevor, I take it you are saying that your lack of inputting the correct data into the ballistics program is somehow not YOUR fault , but rather the fault of the program that didn't know that you weren't using the proper data There's a term for that: GIGO: garbage in, garbage out.

No cigar; try again.
Click to expand...

The garbage data is the info you gave us, nothing more nothing less. But it seems your reliance on a program to hit exactly where your aiming is faulty, you need to recognize there are far more variables that ballistic programs can’t measure which make it only an aid.

Yes EC I believe you are correct we are saying the same thing.

Armorman has just stated what you can’t seem to grasp “If you're the type of person that enjoys ranging targets at unknown distances, especially those over 1000 yards, and would like to dial in and get close to or hit your target on the first shot then you need something to compliment your "real world" data.” What good was close in the moose scenario, a broken jaw and missed game. 100 to over a 1000 close just doesn't get it done.
 
I don't recall saying at any time that I, or anyone, should rely on a ballistics program as a sole source of aiming information. However, I do believe that these programs provide a valuable service in both unknown conditions when you need some guidance , and in known conditions for doing what-if scenarios, such as changing velocity by 100 fps and finding the difference in point of impact. Sure, you can shoot a bunch of lead downrange and figure it out empirically, or you can just change some numbers in your program and have a result that will generally agree very closely with your empirical result.

No one is twisting anyone's arm to use ballistics software, but to categorically state that it's of no conceivable use would seem to me to be somewhat short sighted.

Anyway, I think I've said enough on this subject.
 
When it comes to guessing, and not guessing, as it pertains to shooting, I'll take the not guessing every time. A ballistic program is a must for long range shooting.

R.
 
c3pppo said:
However, I do believe that these programs provide a valuable service in both unknown conditions when you need some guidance , and in known conditions for doing what-if scenarios, such as changing velocity by 100 fps and finding the difference in point of impact.
Click to expand...

And there in lies the problem. You CAN'T know if the next shot you make will have a different velocity or not (actually, you shouldn't need to but I will get to that in a sec).

I fully agree having spent hours mucking about with JBM online, it is a great way to show you what changes in this and that should/could have on your shot. I have compared so many variables, you wonder what normal atmospheric conditions are ;)

Now with the addition of Litz data, we can have a much better comparison of bullet performance at distance and YES, his data does work pretty darn well.

So as a learning tool, superb and highly recommended.

As a field tool, unless you plan on shooting in grossly different environments AND extremely long distances (I shoot out beyond 1 mile), it is really not much better then your printed drop chart.

And whatever program you decide to use, make sure it allows the chart to adjust for real world inputed data. Something as simple as a scope click value can throw everything off.

Ok back to how to reduce the headache of equipment changes over big temp and condition changes. Full details on my website and longrangehunting.com but it boils down to powder and load tuning.

I use Hodgdon Extreme and it is one of the most temp and ambient condition stable powders I am aware of. However, I try and keep my operating temp range to 20C - this you need to test with your rifle under real world conditions. Some will be wider, some smaller but you need to know.

Within this operating window, I find my loads to stay stable and my drop chart to work. So I can hunt from 20C to 0C without worry that my velocity is going to change enough that my drop chart varies enough to miss my intended target at distance.

I definitely will test and tweak my loads as close to my operating temp as possible. So yes, if you hunt in -15C, test in -15C.

If you are using a rifle/ammo/scope combo that varies based on ambient conditions, you are courting with disaster. Properly set up LR rigs shouldn't.

All the handheld gear in the world cannot predict what your stock, scope, barrel and ammo may do under changing ambient conditions

Now I am not saying that you are accurate to the 1/4" at 1000yds, BUT you can be accurate to min of big game if your prep work and shooting skills are dialed in.

I would use the portable programs in a heartbeat if it would help me in my shooting or hunting endeavors but I find that proper gear and prep works just fine.

And the various areas I shoot are similar enough in climate that it really doesn't matter.

That twitchy wind bouncing off that next hillside will do me in way before a falling barometer does.

Jerry

PS anyone up to doing that sunlight test?
 
c3pppo said:
I don't recall saying at any time that I, or anyone, should rely on a ballistics program as a sole source of aiming information. However, I do believe that these programs provide a valuable service in both unknown conditions when you need some guidance , and in known conditions for doing what-if scenarios, such as changing velocity by 100 fps and finding the difference in point of impact. Sure, you can shoot a bunch of lead downrange and figure it out empirically, or you can just change some numbers in your program and have a result that will generally agree very closely with your empirical result.

No one is twisting anyone's arm to use ballistics software, but to categorically state that it's of no conceivable use would seem to me to be somewhat short sighted.
Anyway, I think I've said enough on this subject.
Click to expand...


You must be talking to someone else no one here mentioned anything about the programs having "no conceivable use" Hell if you look at my first post in this thread I recommended a standalone program i recognize the values of software and actual testing and also recognize that really world is always a better indicater. It would be you that appears to be short sighted with regards to the benefits and pitfal of relying on ballistic programs to "generally agree very closely with empirical results"

And I will leave the education part with Jerry's informative posts and I hope you understand.

Trevor
 
I say learn by doing. Build a drop chart. Takes time, patience and money. Then go do it over again in different weather conditions. Repeat often. Keep doing it. Learn a new lesson each time out.
 
Jerry....as you know the wind is something that is visible and fairly predictable by watching wind flags, trees, grass...etc, etc. Temperature, barometric pressure, and humidity all play a very important role at long range and those variables need technology to predict with some level of accuracy. Unless of course your arthritis is so bad that any change in the above variables can be predicted and accurately compensated for by the level of pain you feel in your knees or back or hands. With that in mind a drop table developed for extended long range today is just as usefull the next day as a bull with a set of milkers.

I tell you what....for anyone who's skeptical about these programs the best thing for them would be to go run a JBM simulation (free) at say 1500 - 2000 yards and fudge around with the pressure, temperature, and humidity. Only then will you see the advantage of using a handheld device that runs these programs when you're out in the back 40 plinking. Of course the results that these programs spit out are just a guideline but when you think about it so is the real world data that some shooters accumulated over a lifetime. Nobody is trying to convince anyone that these programs are an essential part of their kit...but....they sure come in handy and take much of the guess work out of the already complicated equation that is long range shooting. As always, ymmv......:).
 
armorman said:
Jerry....as you know the wind is something that is visible and fairly predictable by watching wind flags, trees, grass...etc, etc. Temperature, barometric pressure, and humidity all play a very important role at long range and those variables need technology to predict with some level of accuracy. Unless of course your arthritis is so bad that any change in the above variables can be predicted and accurately compensated for by the level of pain you feel in your knees or back or hands. With that in mind a drop table developed for extended long range today is just as usefull the next day as a bull with a set of milkers.

I tell you what....for anyone who's skeptical about these programs the best thing for them would be to go run a JBM simulation (free) at say 1500 - 2000 yards and fudge around with the pressure, temperature, and humidity. Only then will you see the advantage of using a handheld device that runs these programs when you're out in the back 40 plinking. Of course the results that these programs spit out are just a guideline but when you think about it so is the real world data that some shooters accumulated over a lifetime. Nobody is trying to convince anyone that these programs are an essential part of their kit...but....they sure come in handy and take much of the guess work out of the already complicated equation that is long range shooting. As always, ymmv......:).
Click to expand...

Much better than I was going say. Start adding in massive temperature and pressure swings, all within one day, and you can bet it becomes more essential all the time. I don't leave for the field without it, and a wind meter. With a Palm, I can calculate drops for the conditions as they exist. No need for a printed drop chart. I can change my chart in seconds with the most accurate data I can get. It is another tool availible to help eliminate variables. Damn skippy I'm going to use it, everytime.

R.
 
mysticplayer said:
Simple test.

Set up a rifle in rests and tie it down so it can't move. Center the crosshair on a target at 200yds or further. The further you go, the dramatic the effect is. Do this at say 10am.

come back at noon and 2pm and 4pm and view the target again.

Is the crosshairs still centered?

If you have a variable cloudy day with shiney breaks, you can repeat the test viewing the target as the sun goes in and out of the clouds. Then also at different times of the day.

Just make sure the rifle can't move on its own.

This is something every competition shooter faces and either figures out how to deal with it, or drops a bunch of points.

Jerry
Click to expand...



Those are symptoms, I'm curious what effect you're referring to? Is it effects of heat? Is it an effect of light (casting shadows, for example)?

I've seen some vague references, mainly from people without scientific backgrounds, so their interpretations are somewhat distorted.

If its the effect of either heat or light, both can absolutely be measured and therefore factored into an equation.
 
Jerry, I'm guessing the human iris is affecting the crosshair position. Would a digital camera show the same effect?

Edit: I mean, the iris is a pinhole. Look through iron sights with a pinhole in front of your eye, the sights change alignment as you move the pinhole. As the iris pinholes in bright light, the effect would be more pronounced, and your iris has may not be concentric.
 
Last edited:
Donnie, if there is a way to quantify the affect of light/mirage, you are going to be a very popular guy. If you have ideas, we are all ears

Condition doping continues to be the final unsolved area of LR shooting.

Juster, the affect is not caused by the eye - at least it shouldn't if you have the scope/cheek rest properly set up.

As we all know, air is a fluid and as ambient temp changes, its affect on light also changes.

Although the rifle and target do not physically move, the image you see does. These 'movements' can be very significant over the course of a day.

Give it a try

Jerry
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom